Fact 7: Salzburg Regional Court commissions unlawful counter opinion to protect criminals
The law expressly stipulates in § 314 (2) ZPO that only undisputed genuine handwritten documents may be used for comparison in expert opinions to verify the authenticity of a handwritten document.
Nevertheless, the local Salzburg expert Rettenbacher bases his expert opinion on disputed comparison scripts whose forgery was partly openly admitted.
The handwriting expert later expressly states that he has NEVER checked the authenticity of these settlement documents in the course of his preparation of the expert opinion and has not requested the parties to make any statement on the authenticity, but has simply assumed the genuineness – of these settlement manuscripts submitted exclusively by the suspects – without checking.
Despite this factually and legally unambiguous situation, the judiciary refuses to depart from this unlawful and false expert opinion and bases its judgment on this factually untenable and clearly unlawful expert opinion of Rettenbacher for the protection of the influential perpetrators.
In connection with the factual reports 1-7, this unlawful procedure impressively proves that the Salzburg Regional Court does not obtain objective court expert opinions, but knowingly orders false expert opinion results from willing court experts, whose grossly negligent false expert opinions are subsequently defended in court by all means to protect the criminal friends of the friends.
